Thanks for the link. Yeah, I figured an Ant-Man movie would be mostly standalone (as most of the Big Four's intro movies were, for the most part). What I meant with my Ultron comment was more that Ultron might be in the background of Ant-Man, it could just be something that Hank is working on. They can still do something like that in Ant-Man and then have Ultron be activated in The Avengers 2.

Whatever they end up doing, it does sound like the movie's getting closer and closer to happening, so that's cool.

As an aside, I'm curious. Is Chris Evans still under contract from Fox for a second Fantastic Four sequel? Typically when actors sign contracts for franchise films, they usually get roped into a three/four movie deal. He's reportedly got a 9 picture deal with Marvel for the Captain America role. Although at this point, Fox may just opt for another reboot like Sony did with Spider-Man.

Unlike Siegel and Shuster, who were basically a couple of kids with no business savvy, Jack Kirby was a middle aged man with a twenty year career in comics when he went to work for hire at Marvel. He knew exactly what his contract terms were, having worked in the industry for his entire adult life at that point. Furthermore, he took no financial risk of his own in doing so (he got paid whether a book sold or bombed, unlike the publisher who took the actual risk) and he was more than willing to jump from company to company (Timely, Fawcett, DC, Harvey, Atlas, DC, Marvel) , depending on who offered him the best deal at the time. So you can't even factor in a "loyalty" argument. In fact, at one point in the 50s, he and Simon started their own company, which is further evidence that man was no babe in the woods who didn't realize what rights he was signing away.

Furthermore, when Joe Simon was in litigation with Marvel over Captain America in the late sixties, Kirby took Marvel's side.

Finally, even if Kirby deserved more remuneration for the characters, that doesn't mean his kids, who had nothing to do with his work, do.

Click to expand...

I didn't mean any litigation at all. Of course they're under no obligation. I just think it'd be the decent thing to do. "Hey, our movie just made a shit-ton of money, why don't we throw a little bit toward the guy's family?"

I'm wondering if eventually it's going to be TOO big. I mean, presumably the actors who are in Avengers at the moment aren't going to do it forever. So then do they switch out some of the characters? It'll probably be okay if they keep some of the heavy hitters but are people going to have the same excitement for an Avengers film with a second-string line up?

As an aside, I'm curious. Is Chris Evans still under contract from Fox for a second Fantastic Four sequel? Typically when actors sign contracts for franchise films, they usually get roped into a three/four movie deal. He's reportedly got a 9 picture deal with Marvel for the Captain America role. Although at this point, Fox may just opt for another reboot like Sony did with Spider-Man.

I was brainstorming with a friend, and since a standalone Hulk film would be difficult to pull off, we'd like to see a Hulk Vs Wolverine, or Hulk Vs The Thing, film. both of which had been done in comics. Obviously, unless those rights revert to Marvel, we'll never see either of those crossovers.

I was brainstorming with a friend, and since a standalone Hulk film would be difficult to pull off, we'd like to see a Hulk Vs Wolverine, or Hulk Vs The Thing, film. both of which had been done in comics. Obviously, unless those rights revert to Marvel, we'll never see either of those crossovers.

Click to expand...

Not sure how you could stretch that into a two hour movie though. There's only so many times you can watch the same two people fight, and even Hulk would eventually clue in that he was fighting one of the good guys.

Unless you have him under some evil influence the entire time or something.